Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tumbleweed_Connection; Just another Joe; Madame Dufarge; MeeknMing; steve50; Cantiloper; metesky; ..

2 posted on 08/12/2005 4:29:26 PM PDT by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: SheLion
If it were my land and my restaurant, I would not be happy
3 posted on 08/12/2005 4:35:43 PM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection (I urge Roberts to support all sections of the Constitution which uphold abortion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: SheLion
...secondhand smoke is now known to increase the risk of heart attack with as little as thirty minutes of exposure.

Wouldn't you love to see the documentation backing up that assertion?

7 posted on 08/12/2005 4:45:19 PM PDT by DumpsterDiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: SheLion
In addition to causing lung cancer, heart disease, and other long term diseases in nonsmokers, secondhand smoke is now known to increase the risk of heart attack with as little as thirty minutes of exposure.

Wah! Say anything! Wah! Me no like smoke! Wah!

Geez, they get more rediculous all the time.

Good to see ya back, sweetheart.

8 posted on 08/12/2005 4:50:13 PM PDT by metesky (This land was your land, this land is MY land; I bought the rights from a town selectman!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: SheLion; All
I have now made it a point that I will not frequent establishments where smokers are not welcome. As of right now it is a non-issue here in Michigan but as the socialists become more and more brazen, they have starting talking about banning smokers from privately owned businesses.

Since restaurants and bars are merely diversions for me and not necessities, when and if such a ban takes place, then any establishment that bans smoking will not get any revenues from me........

Of all the bans going into effect across this country, the MSM has conveniently neglected to post any articles relevant to businesses losing money and/or going out of business completely. Nor have they printed any articles about the uppity non-smokers who complained about the smoking atmospheres, increasing their visits to the adversely affected businesses in an attempt to help make up for the revenues these establishments have lost due to the smoking bans........

10 posted on 08/12/2005 5:09:28 PM PDT by Hot Tabasco (What is a homosexual Islamic Jihadist going to do with 72 virgins? Can he give them away?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: SheLion

"secondhand smoke is now known to increase the risk of heart attack with as little as thirty minutes of exposure."




Oh puhleeze! Soon they will be saying all of the GI's that died during WWII died of heart attacks due to smoking,not combat.

God almighty!!!!


11 posted on 08/12/2005 5:19:05 PM PDT by Mears (Keep the government out of my face!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: SheLion
Toxicology studies absent in smoking theories August 08, 2005

Re: Data Supports Ban, July 30.

What I find interesting is that the Canadian Cancer Society only references epidemiological studies as their proof that second-hand smoke is a health hazard.

Epidemiology can only show the relative strength of possible relationships. In order to show the cause of a disease, it is required that there be toxicology studies.

Using a simple survey given out to cancer patients asking them to recall exposure to a substance as they are being diagnosed isn't realistic science. This isn't proof, it is conjecture -- at best a biased guess, not proof of cause.

The statistics-based theory that second-hand smoke is a cause of cancer ignores the real science called toxicology.

Dose relationships recognizes safe levels of exposure to potentially hazardous substances. This well-established science allows uranium to be mined, cars to be painted and toll booth workers to survive high levels of exhaust thanks to adequate ventilation, monitoring and compliance to established limits of exposure.

There are only five unique chemicals released in tobacco smoke. All of the other substances in second-hand smoke cited as being of concern occur in far greater quantities and concentrations in everyday life. Sources like candles, cooking fumes, vehicle exhaust, welding fumes and most domestic and industrial processes cause the release into the air of formaldehyde, benzene, Benzo-a-pyrene and thousands of other chemicals in amounts measured in tons as compared to the micrograms released by burning tobacco.

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) says "in normal situations, exposures would not exceed these permissible exposure limits (PELs), and, as a matter of prosecutorial discretion, OSHA will not apply the General Duty Clause to ETS."

The anti-tobacco campaign is all about fear-mongering, has no real scientific basis, and is just plain wrong. The real data and real science does not support the ban.

It should be the business owners' decision to allow smoking in his business, not a decision made by extremist tobacco control groups. It's better to be safe then sorry, but please, base regulations on real science.

The economy shouldn't suffer when there's no proof of danger.

Lynda Duguay

Allenford, Ont

http://www.canada.com/

References:

As an example of the overstated risks and how they create false phobias, a list of chemicals in tobacco smoke is listed below and how many cigarettes burning at the same time it would take to reach the lower threshold of danger in a room 20x20 with 9 foot ceilings at standard temperature and air pressure with no ventilation.

2-Toluidine................229,000 Benzene.......................1290 Acetone...................118,700 Benzo {a} Pyrene......222,000 Cadmium......................1430 Formic acid...................1790 Methylchloride.............11170 Phenol..........................7600

As you can see from this example, thousands to hundreds of thousands of cigarettes would have to be smoked at once to create a hazard, even in a un-ventilated room! This list was compiled by the Public and Health Policy Research group Littlewood & Fennel of Austin, Texas in 1999 for OSHA.

Toxicology studies absent in smoking theories

12 posted on 08/12/2005 6:11:31 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson